The Jefferson County SMP imposes one-size fits all requirements (including 150 foot buffers and the onerous permitting restrictions) that will harm shoreline property owners, property valuations, and county tax revenue from these properties.
Key issues with CAPR’s challenge of Jefferson County’s SMP adoption include violations on the constitutional issue of procedural due process in the adoption of the SMP; violation of the constitutional right to a neutral judge at the first instance of review (vs. the politically stacked GMHB that starts with the assumption the government is correct with the SMP); lack of consideration of economic impacts, per the requirements of both the State Economic Policy Act and the Shoreline Management Act; and the concept of nexus and proportionality, which relates to the connection between regulatory requirements and the supposed damage to shorelines by simple developments.
In February, CAPR filed opening briefs in the Court of Appeals, having moved to appeal from the Growth Management Hearings Board review. The next major activity in this precedential case will occur when the response briefs of Jefferson County and the Department of Ecology are filed.
June 6, 2016